Readers' Letters: Does Kate Forbes want to help Hospitality or not?

This is the same Kate Forbes who as part of the SNP Government is set to allow councils to impose a tourist tax, not at £1 a night as first envisaged, but at perhaps 5 per cent in Edinburgh, which is closer to £10 a night. And the same Kate Forbes who could have used the UK allocation of funds to help hospitality through a reduction in business rates, but spent the money elsewhere, forcing several hospitality business to shut down.

I am surprised because I actually quite respected Kate Forbes, but it looks as if like so many other SNP MSPs, she wants to help hospitality but only if someone else pays the bill. Quite why I’m surprised, I do not know, because it is in their DNA!

Brian Barbour, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland

Money problems

Your editorial of 22 June claims Labour “must hit the ground running” to avoid voter disillusionment, but comments by Peter Mandelson on BBC1’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg suggest Labour’s manifesto will be difficult to implement given their reliance on growing the economy.

For Labour’s “fully funded” plans to succeed the economy needs to grow considerably. It can’t rely on a relatively minimal tax take from the oil companies, non-doms and private schools. The former Business Secretary, responding to former Chancellor Philip Hammond’s claim that growth was not a “silver bullet”, conceded that achieving growth was a “long term” strategy, suggesting that it may only be achieved beyond this parliament.

Given, therefore, that Labour promise not to increase personal taxes, that leaves higher borrowing and austerity measures to fund their manifesto commitments. The latter would be political suicide, so once again it seems that Labour will be forced into borrowing more. Will 2029 be 2010 all over again with another “no money left” note for the incoming government?

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Oh, the irony

First Minister John Swinney says, ironically, “Scotland’s voice simply doesn't matter to Westminster”. But John Swinney represents Scotland’s population in all key areas – health, education, taxes, transport, police, law etc, and as a non- Independence voter my voice has simple not mattered for the last 14 years to the SNP government.

Elizabeth Hands, Armadale, West Lothian

Gender gap

I have already cast and posted my vote for Labour, but I confess to some troubling misgivings about their lack of decisiveness and clarity on the question of gender. That they could lose the support of one of their leading donors and staunch political supporters in author JK Rowling is astonishing. She finds the lack of detail, in what they have stated so far on the matter, bothersome, it would seem.

JK Rowling has never spoken anything but the unalloyed truth on the matter of gender and has no agenda other than wanting to protect the rights of biological women and girls and not have them sacrificed on a trans altar.

Now, who could possibly disagree with that?

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh

Mad economics

I saw recently that John Swinney, in the SNP manifesto, was demanding the next UK Government spend an additional £10 billion on the NHS, which would give the Scottish Government another £1bn by way of Barnet consequentials.

With the UK debt standing at over £2 trillion he does not seem to realise that an ever-increasing debt would damage Scotland if, heaven help us, we were to become Independent. Our share of that debt would be in excess of £200bn on a pro rata basis, with a much higher interest rate than the rest of the UK. As ever it is the SNP Government's economics of the madhouse.

Jack Watt, St Ola, Orkney

Be honest

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) is to be applauded for tackling the elephant in the room in this general election campaign, that is, the stark choices the key political parties will have to make in relation to public finances if elected.

We in the UK are experiencing the highest level of debt for more than 60 years, the tax burden is at a record high and public services are struggling.

While the Government is paying huge interest on this debt, and welfare bills have grown; spending on health is likely to increase because of an ageing population, with the funding of defence also set to rise. The solution to deliver increased investment, higher economic growth, is a pipe dream in at least the short to medium term.

Taxes will therefore have to rise – despite a commitment by the main political parties not to raise VAT, National Insurance or income tax – or cuts made in public services. The alternative is to borrow more and see debt continue to escalate.

The main political parties must end this conspiracy of silence and be honest with the public as to what is in store further down the line. However, I would urge the voters not to hold their breath on this happening.

Alex Orr, Edinburgh

A matter of bands

During the election leaders’ debates Anas Sarwar has repeatedly challenged John Swinney as to why a nurse in Scotland on a salary of £29,000 pays more in tax than a nurse in England. For some reason he studiously avoids using the term “equivalent”. Perhaps that’s because a nurse at an equivalent level in Scotland earns more than a similar nurse in England. By definition then, a nurse here will pay more in tax even if the bands were identical. That's how taxation bands work!

Take a Band 5 staff nurse as an example. In England they will earn £28,407 on which they will pay tax at 20 per cent after deducting the personal allowance of £12,750. This will leave them with a take home salary of £25,276. Meanwhile, their equivalent in Scotland earns £30,229 which, with the same personal allowance, leaves them with a taxable salary of £17,479. But the rate here is marginally higher at 21 per cent so they are left with a take home pay of £26,558.

In Scotland, therefore, a staff nurse in a similar band will be better off to the tune of £1,282 per annum compared to their English equivalent. Moreover, they will enjoy a larger pension and shorter working hours according to most nursing periodicals. So what, precisely, is Mr Sarwar’s attack line on this issue? I'm baffled.

Robert Menzies, Falkirk

Lose the sleaze

Very well said Christine Jardine (“Public faith in politicians must be restored”, Perspective, 24 June), politics must be purged of sleaze, with MPs focusing on serving their constituents, rather than how to make a fast buck or avoid scandal. If Labour is indeed returned to Westminster, I suspect the majority of voters will not expect miracles, so long as they can depend on integrity and believe their concerns are at the forefront of every politician’s agenda.

Joyce Gunn Cairns, Edinburgh

Half the story

It would appear that the Labour Party did not review the SNP Energy plan before deciding to decarbonise the grid by 2030. There is a complete refusal by politicians to note that, even in Scotland, increasing wind capacity, at a capital cost of around £275 billion, from 15GW to 60GW still results in not one iota of electricity being generated if the wind fails to blow.

The SNP solution is to install 25GW of hydrogen-fuelled gas turbines units to keep the lights on in the 200 days a year when there is insufficient wind to meet consumer demand. If 5MW electrolysers are selected that means 5,000 units require to be built around Scotland, plus a similar number of hydrogen storage vessels.

Why, then, do advocates of renewable electricity refuse to add the back-up costs in the unit price of energy ? After all, replacing gas at 6p/unit with renewable electricity at 24p/unit will treble the annual cost of energy to the consumer in place of the £300 a year reduction promised by the Labour Party.

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries and Galloway

Look to Canada

I keep hearing people comparing the General Election of 2024 with the Tony Blair landslide of 1997 and there are similarities.

However, it was the Canadian General Election of 1993 which may be more of a parallel. The Conservatives went from 169 seats to 2 in 1993, the worst ever Government defeat of any modern democracy. The brand new Reform Party (yes really) took 52.

Stephen Harper took the Conservatives back into power in 2006 but he had actually been elected under the Reform banner back in 1993. The Reform Party merged with the Conservatives to become the Conservative Party Of Canada. Canadians still debate which one swallowed the other.

John V Lloyd, Inverkeithing. Fife

Feeling Bullish

I do hope that the Scottish Rugby Union uses Glasgow Warriors’ terrific victory for rugby – they beat the Bulls at the United Rugby Championship final in Pretoria – in Scotland as a marketing tool for further development of the Scottish game.

Can we please acknowledge this unique achievement by hosting a celebration at Murrayfield, the home of Scottish rugby.

Ebyth Morton, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.